Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European ...

Populism and Democracy 21
themselves − and succeed in being considered − an integral part of the
people. They are of the people. For their part, the people acclaim the populist
leader as one of them, but, at the same time, consider him/her better
than them and recognize that s/he is endowed with the (often allegedly
charismatic) qualities to lead them.
Which elements of the political culture are most conducive to the shaping
of populist mentalities? There are two main elements which create the
opportunity/space for the appearance of populist mentalities. The first one
is a relatively common theme based on the rejection of politics, and, as a
logical consequence, of politicians. There is no contradiction, however,
between the rejection of politics and the political activism of populist politicians.
Some political activities are always justified by populist leaders (and
their followers) as temporarily indispensable in order to put an end to politics.
This rejection of politics is more than a simple rejection just of ‘representative
politics’, as Paul Taggart (2002) argues. Populist leaders promise
that they will get rid of traditional politics as soon as possible, although
they do not explain which kind of new politics they will construct, other
than to say that the leader will be fully accessible to the people. The existence
of an anti-political mentality among the people constitutes an excellent
breeding ground for populist inclinations and attitudes. It is the preliminary
condition for the unconditional delegation of authority to the
populist leader. The most important difference within societies concerns
the role and prestige of politics, as defined and assessed by the respective
political cultures. Societies where the dominant political culture attaches
no prestige to politics, but where, nonetheless, politics plays an important
role in the allocation of resources, will in all likelihood develop strong and
widespread anti-political sentiments (Crosti, 2004).
The second, more recent, element which is obviously closely linked to
anti-political mentality is anti-party sentiment. In the populist mentality,
there is no appreciation at all for the idea that we need groups of individuals
who can acquire political and institutional knowledge and apply it to the
running of public affairs. Party politicians are always considered an obstacle
to the expression of the ‘true’ will of the people. Professional politicians are
never seen as part of the solution. On the contrary, they are exclusively part
of the problem because it is their competition as much as their collusion
that is responsible for the appearance, on the one hand, of tensions, conflicts
and divisions among the people, and, on the other, of stalemate, waste
and corruption in the decision-making process. Only after the suppression
of the existing politics − which is also held responsible for allowing
particular social groups, tycoons and monopolists to become unjustifiably
prosperous − will the people have a common purpose and be able to live in
harmony. Left to itself, society would be free from conflicts, for it is politics
which makes societies conflict-ridden. Though vague and ill-defined, the
populist utopia depicts an undifferentiated society of individuals who work